Good point and very succinct. I think most people would agree with this statement. The disagreement comes in what is a "faithful" recreation. How close to Note for Note do you have to get?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Playing note for note.
- Thread starter Ric5
- Start date
Good point and very succinct. I think most people would agree with this statement. The disagreement comes in what is a "faithful" recreation. How close to Note for Note do you have to get?
Great point, and I didn't use the word nor mean to imply "better." Simon and Garfunkel's version of "America" is just as good as Yes' version...in its own way, to its own audience.
The Beatles, Stones, and Joe Cocker's band had chops, that's why their covers sound so damn good to so many people. And if you and your band can re-work a song and breathe new life into it like that, and it entertains and resonates with a room full of strangers in the process--you have chops and creativity. Don't be modest.
This is my experience as well.
And, sadly, many bands have fooled themselves into thinking they have somehow improved on the original, when in fact they have butchered it.
Says who? The audiences and venue owners and managers.
What is even worse is when the musicians don't have the skills to do justice to the original, so they crudely hack it up in their own "style" (read: "limited skills version"), in the name of "art." What a load of crap.
For too many bands, this is just a cop out. They can't do faithful versions, so they mask their shortcomings with the sour grapes routine. "We don't want to sound like the original." Well, okay, but do you want to sound like shite? Because that's where you are...
And we sit around here and talk about why live music is so under-appreciated and de-valued. Maybe there are just too many hacks out there with too many justifications.
I have to admit that I usually play pretty close to the original recording when possible. I don't have monster chops and I'm not an arranger. I just don't like other people telling me that I HAVE to do it. Most of my re-arranging comes from necessity from playing in a guitar/bass/drums/singer configuration.
1. I just don't hear these guys playing anything that I don't hear from many bass players still on the club circuit.
You missed my point. You aren't hearing anything that blows you away because the song doesn't call for it. You can't assess the skill of a player by what you hear on a CD. For example, Nathan East is one of the best players on the planet, but if you listen to some of his work with Clapton or Fourplay, you're not going to hear any mind-boggling chops.
2. I don't know where this comment comes from. I never said anything about how many notes someone plays. You just made this up to make your point.
So what is it you need to hear on a CD that will blow you away? Bob Babbit has played on hundreds, if not thousands, of tracks. None of what I've heard is remarkably hard to play. So what does that say about his talent as a bassist?
3. I agree with this, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my argument which is about what I hear on CDs.
My point is that whatever it is you want to hear that will blow you away isn't the only thing that makes a player a good player.
4. If you can't judge someone's playing ability by what they play, then I'm not sure how else to judge it. I can only comment on what I hear.
You've missed the point again. What you hear on a CD isn't likely to show what the player's capabilties are. If you listen to someone like Dave Koz on his CD, you're not going to hear the chops that his bassist Bill Sharpe puts into a live show (in fact, Bill doesn't even play on the CDs).
5. Again, nonsense totally made up to make your point. I never said anything about personal glory.
I'm just trying to figure out what you need to hear to blow you away. Could you please direct me to a couple recordings in which the bassist blows you away? Not YouTube, since live performances typically are not the same as the CD. Usually the music is not about the bass line. It may be that many or even most bass lines don't require an inordinate amount of skill. After all, I play covers pretty close to the record, so it can't be that hard. But I don't claim to have anywhere near the chops of the guys who make a living at it.
jive1
Commercial User
IMO, there are some great bassists and basslines that can't be mimiced. Take Jamerson for example. That guy was a stream of consciousness player who just instinctively played the right notes at the right time with an amazing feel, and incredible touch. How the heck am I gonna cop Jamerson note for note? I can get an old P-bass, throw some 10 year old LaBella flats on them, install the foam mute, and practice for weeks using the transcriptions of his exact bassline and still not get it "note-for-note". The main reason is because I'm not Jamerson. The best I will get is me doing a good job of copping Jamerson. Notes include time, and feel is hard to transcribe feel. I'm confident I can nail the notes, and some of the time, but the feel is different. I can come close, but I won't sound just like Jamerson, because I'm not Jamerson. But that won't stop me from playing a Motown tune and having people enjoy it.
+1
And that's why so many on this thread (including me) are willing to admit that many times, you can only come so close.
Wow, can't believe how many pages this is.
I have mixed feelings on this. There can be certain songs that I want to try to recreate "note for note." Mostly this is for the self indulgent pleasure for the band in pulling off something difficult. That stuff is probabaly never leaving the practice room anyway.
As a general rule, I don't know that it is imperative for a cover band to be perfect. Tribute band, maybe moreso.
I think there are always certain phrases, notes, licks, etc. that are going to be really important, and which will be sorely missed if left out. A lot of basslines are not going to fit into that category.
I'd be pretty surprised if even other band members noticed a bass line that was not a "perfect" copy. Do they really know the bass line note for note? You can bet the audiences don't (except maybe the bass players...)
I enjoy trying to learn something like the original as best I can, just for the challenge of picking it out and the ideas gained from it. That does not mean the band MUST perform it exactly like the original.
In the end, it is up to each band to choose their own path. I think a band can sound great playing their own version, and a band can sound bad playing an "exact" version.
I have mixed feelings on this. There can be certain songs that I want to try to recreate "note for note." Mostly this is for the self indulgent pleasure for the band in pulling off something difficult. That stuff is probabaly never leaving the practice room anyway.
As a general rule, I don't know that it is imperative for a cover band to be perfect. Tribute band, maybe moreso.
I think there are always certain phrases, notes, licks, etc. that are going to be really important, and which will be sorely missed if left out. A lot of basslines are not going to fit into that category.
I'd be pretty surprised if even other band members noticed a bass line that was not a "perfect" copy. Do they really know the bass line note for note? You can bet the audiences don't (except maybe the bass players...)
I enjoy trying to learn something like the original as best I can, just for the challenge of picking it out and the ideas gained from it. That does not mean the band MUST perform it exactly like the original.
In the end, it is up to each band to choose their own path. I think a band can sound great playing their own version, and a band can sound bad playing an "exact" version.
jive1
Commercial User
Yup, because some people will dig what you do, and other's won't no matter what you do.
I was at an open mic a while back, and there was this teenager who was playing Texas Flood by SRV, note-for-note. I was pretty impressed. But the guy next to me said, "The kid has some chops, but he has no creativity". At a different open mic, the group up there was doing a killin' funky version of Killing Floor. I overheard someone saying, "These guys have no respect for the Blues".
You can't please everyone, so please who you can, and hopefully one of them is you.
I can see that you are sincere in wishing to debate this and I appreciate your point of view. However, I can only judge someone by what I hear them play and with no real objective criteria, it's just my opinion.
Rather than talk about the obvious greats (most of whom we would probably agree on), the people I think are average to good would be the bass players for the following bands - Joe Stump, We Are The Fallen, Epica, Within Temptation, Halestorm, Unsun, Krypteria, Heart, Bullet for my Valentine, Def Leppard, Fly Leaf, The Letter Black, Dokken, Korn, ZZ Top, White Snake, Van Halen, Type O Negative, Tom Petty, The Pretenders, The Outlaws, The Cure, The Cult, The Cars, Super Tramp, Stone Temple Pilots, Smashing Pumpkins. This is not an insult to any of these players. I'm not saying they are bad, and there may be an exception since I haven't heard all the material by all of these bands, but by and large I think that many bass players at the club level could play in any of these bands. You are also entitled to your opinion, but I don't think we'll ever agree on this point.
My real point was that I believe that just because someone is in a band that has a CD doesn't mean they are so good that we have to play their lines exactly like the record.
I concur ... and then there's the issue of what the other players are playing which might not quite match up no matter how hard everybody is trying to. It's a fools errand to get that anal about it. I wouldn't stake my life on it, but I suspect that what you hear on most memorable recordings that Jamerson (and other great, in the moment, feel players like him) played on were like snowflakes ... one of a kind and unique to that particular take and never to be repeated again. He probably wouldn't hold himself to replicate his own parts playing live or recording the same song with a different artist so why should we?
Then we disagree. If everybody was great then great would be average. Some people think that good means bad. Good is a compliment.
The thing about an average bar band covering a tune is not whether they have the chops to create a prog-rock classic. The question is whether they ought to play the actual songs on their list note-for-note. For your typical bar band set list, you're not necessarily playing intricate prog-rock classics in the first place. Supposing you're a reasonably competent (but not brilliant) cover band bassist playing Summer of '69 or whatever. Is it really so wrong or bad not to play that bass line note-for-note? I would say just about any extra fills or variations, if not overdone, would be welcome and liven up the song rather than just drumming out eighth-note roots ad nauseam. If the bass player puts his own style and expression into his playing, without making a train wreck of the song, I say more power to him.
This whole implication that any average bar band bassist could sub for Simon Gallup of The Cure, for example, just really bothers me. Don't you think for a minute that maybe, just maybe, there is anything besides "dumb luck" that separates the mediocre (garden variety bar band) from the great (selling out Madison Square Garden)??! Hint: the answer is yes...there is no debating this!
Yeah, well, Fieldy...I mean, come on. Just because you're popular doesn't mean you're "good." If we're all holding ourselves up to Fieldy so we can eventually sell as many albums as him, why bother?
First of all I never said anything about dumb luck, so if you disagree with me, please disagree with the things I say, not made up arguments. Second I said average to good, not mediocre so again, no made up arguments. Third Simon Gallup falls directly into the average to good category. Fourth, if you think that good bass playing has anything to do with selling out Madison Square Garden you are crazy and there is no debating that. You are confusing great bands with great bass players (not that I think the Cure is either, buth that's just my opinion).
Okay, we're obviously misinterpreting each other and we have different opinions on top of that. I hate arguing on the Internet and I don't even care, let's just drop it.
